What makes a "fast" machine? (was Re: [G4] MDD Config)

[John Niven]

--- Frank Sudore <fsudore at mac.com> wrote:
> to be honest I think the former machine was faster.
> Just my 2¢
> Frank


I have every simpathy Frank, but statements like this
always make me wonder. I think this is a topic that
could/should be explored by the computer industry.

I think there is a difference between how "experts"
and "the industry" define fast, and the experience of
the average user (in which I include myself). 

When you are at home, and surfing the web, and you
click on a link, you have to wait while the page
loads. Even if you have cable, sometimes that's the
slowest link. So it won't get any better with a newer,
faster 'puter, will it?

My main machine at home is a dual 450GHz G4 tower.
When my wife needed a new 'puter, I bought her an
Intel iMac. Admittedly this was to:

1) Stop her moaning about "old" computers.
3) We liked that form-factor.
2) It looks really cool!

But on the occasions that I've used it, it seems slow
or at least not significantly faster. Which is
surprising when you consider how much more "powerful"
the Intel cpu are claimed to be.

So I wonder if anybody has ever done a study of what
factors influence a users perception of how "fast" a
computer is? I wounder how significant are things
like:

1) How much cache ram and main ram?
2) Disk speed / type?
3) video card?
4) number and speed of cpu?

In my case the iMac is standard, but my G4 has 1Gb of
ram (twice the iMac's) and runs from a U160 SCSI disk
hung from a ATTO PCI controller. The G4 also has a
flashed eBay ATI RADEON 9200 video card.

I guess if you edit video or do intensive photoshop
work then your experience maybe different.




      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ